Maybe the kids aren't alright--as @jburnmurdoch illustrates--because political text messages are causing a spike in toxic learned helplessness, and they are getting higher doses relative to other sources of information.

🚨🚨🚨Can judges really know what “reasonable people” think? Can AI help bridge that gap—and can AI agents themselves behave “reasonably” in the wild? A new draft, The Silicon Reasonable Person, asks these questions. tl;dr: early signs point to yes, with careful limits.

I share @DKThomp's s worry that AI is acting as a daffodil that produces a generation of narcissists. But as the essay's charts show, it's the pre-trends that are terrible. Isn't talking to flattering chatbox better than scrolling youtube comments?

I share @DKThomp's worry that AI is acting a daffodil that produces a generation of narcissists. But as essay's charts show, its the pre-trends that are terrible. Isn't talking to chatbox that tells you are smart better than scrolling youtube comments?

New substack post, for the afternoon crowd.

I am giving substack a shot. My first post asks if economic duress doctrine would allow universities to eventually recoup the sums of money they are paying the treasury in response to Trump's pressure campaigns. My answer is "maybe."

This also explains Part IV of all modern law review articles.

Does the numbering typo in this venue paragraph render it unenforceable due to ambiguity? The PA Supreme Court (properly in my view) said no last week:

This was clearly written and good--and it confirmed my priors about LPE. And/also, the question of whether uber operated in a legal "gray area" or flouted the law is hard to answer.

Grim to think about the flattering profiles that some would write about this nattily-attired and well-coiffed young man today.